Search This Blog

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Corbett contra mundum

Hopeless MEP Richard Corbett continues to struggle with the Irish no vote on his blog (no comments please).

He writeth:

Suppose the future reform of the House of Lords required the approval of every county. Suppose that all county councils agree the reform, except Herefordshire, which votes "No".

What should be done? Should reform be abandoned because one county votes against? Should Herefordshire be asked to vote again, in light of the support of every other county? Should Herefordshire's concerns be identified, if possible, and an attempt made at a compromise?

That is the situation facing European coutries, [sic] who negotiated a package of reforms to the EU, which one country has rejected, while most if not all of the others continue to support it. Reform of the EU needs approval from every single member state.

So in Corbett's vision the EU is a bit like... a single country?

National governments are going to become like... county councils?

Thanks for clearing that up. At least it's nice to know what the direction of travel is.

He's also put his finger neatly on the reason why a federal EU can never work - people just don't feel part of the same demos, and won't accept being outvoted in this way.

3 comments:

I note with interest that Corbett doesn't allow any comment on his blog whatsoever (you can scent the fear from here, t'other side of the country).

Far be it for any MEP to engage in actual democracy. They're all too busy on other things.

The thing that really struck me in the clip (linked above) wasn't the predictable behaviour of EU's own thought police, but the "How dare you?!" of the Green MEP once caught. Well, dear, it's called the freedom of the press and it's fundamental to a healthy democracy. Perhaps her crypto-communist credentials mean she isn't terribly keen on the 'democracy' part of all that. Still, I guess the expenses are nice...

We have to go by the rules in the Treaty,ALL 27 Countries have to ratify BEFORE IT CAN COME INTO OPERATION.

As for the other matter, Richard Corbett is quite correct. All those that debated the EEC as it was in the 1960's knew exactly what it was to become.Here for you is a snatch of those proceedings -On 3rd August 1961 (column 1735) Mr Shinwell continues his words after having read out a part of the Treaty of Rome, ending with "reinforcement of the European Parliament through direct elections and widening of its powers and, finally, a European Government. That is the intention. That is their object and that is what they are saying on Hon Members can talk until they are black in the face about the Rome Treaty and there being no provision for federation, but there is no doubt that from the declarations made by some of the most influential people--M.Spaak, Professor Hallstein and others who have indicated that there is a definite intention and that once we accept the economic provisions of the Rome Treaty---and it looks as though this government might---they are on their way towards complete political integration".

"I wonder what this place will be like during the course of the next ten years? There will not be 630 Hon Members. There will be no need for more than 150 or so. It will be like---"

Mr A. C. Manuel, "A Council".

Mr Shinwell, "I was about to say a Parish Council, with the authority of some kind delegated to it by the European Parliament and dictated to be a European Government. To that we are being led".END

The question that should be asked, was it TREASON back then?? It was most certainly a betrayal of all the people in this Country that had been told it was a Common Market, and it was indeed a violation of their Oath of Allegiance to the Crown. What today's politicians are doing now, the way they treated the House of Commons during the debates just turning up to vote was contempt for the British system of Government, it was contempt for all the people they are supposed to represent, and contempt for the true governing of this Country. Remain in the EU and there is not point in keeping the Houses of Parliament going. The people should have a refund of all the money they have paid out to British MP's, and the Lords.